mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-31 14:16:39 +01:00
441b35fd0dcfb520aecbb6cf0157bc2b716dd4f4
5
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 DottaandPaperclip
|
d172197117 |
feat(storage): add plain directory sync with conflict preflight (#14416)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Agent runs use workspace transport to restore and collect files. > - Some directories belong to the agent across tasks. > - Those directories need plain file transport without task Git state. > - A concurrent file edit must be detected before a merge changes any file. > - This pull request adds optional plain-directory sync and conflict preflight. > - Existing task workspace sync keeps its defaults. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #14325. This is the transport prerequisite for a replacement of its instruction revision design with current agent files. ## What Changed - Add an opt-in plain-directory transport mode to command and sandbox runtimes. - Add strict merge preflight for file edits, deletions, and directory changes. - Accept identical replay after an interrupted merge. Preserve competing changes. - Set the compiled OpenCode test executable to 0755, independent of the CI host’s file-creation mask. Preserve the original startup error if cleanup also fails. ## Verification - At `ced53ae532ce6966cad5a83575d83db61af98126`, all 212 targeted transport tests passed across workspace restore, remote managed runtime, SSH fixture, and execution-target sandbox suites. Adapter-utils typecheck passed. - Real isolated SSH retry fixture previously passed with `PAPERCLIP_ENABLE_DARWIN_SSH_ENV_LAB=1`; stale deleted files remain absent while gitignored binary bytes survive. - Dependent PR #14420 passed real native local, legacy local, and native Daytona persistence E2E at `169fab46d5af21caa2269b4c1b29b69c933a6951`, which includes all production transport changes through `ced53ae53`; the subsequent two commits only fix the OpenCode test fixture. Nine tasks, three server restarts, and all cleanup checks passed. - A hosted OpenCode fixture failed twice at `ced53ae53`. Reproduced the failure locally and in Linux with `umask 0002`: the compiler created a group-writable executable, correctly rejected by the qualified launch boundary. Explicit 0755 permissions fix the test without weakening the production guard. The focused test and non-root Linux reproduction now pass under that same mask. - Before rebase, head `69e97de0475d34aac5d532e559a405eaf015fd2b` includes the deterministic fixture permission fix and preserves original bootstrap diagnostics. All production transport code is unchanged since the 212-test validation. Fresh Greptile review is 5/5 on this exact head with no unresolved findings. All 54 current-head checks passed, with two conditional skips. The full CI run completed successfully, including the previously failing OpenCode runner shard. - Merge validation on rebased head `c509d79dd190c5cb00dc65edfde209097ff21465`: all five commits are patch-identical to the reviewed branch. All 54 checks passed with two conditional skips, and fresh Greptile review is 5/5 with no findings. One retry cleared an npm archive 404 and a Cursor fixture timeout. ## Risks - New behavior is opt-in. Existing task snapshot behavior retains its defaults. - Generic strict merge preflight remains opt-in. The dependent agent-folder feature rebases changed paths before applying them to provide per-file last-sync-wins; it does not create a conflict-review queue. - This change adds no database migration, dependency, or UI. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The session does not expose a more specific model ID or context-window size. Reasoning, code execution, and tool use assisted this change. Live provider validation used `gpt-5.6-sol`. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
198fc8b281 |
fix(adapter-utils): harden the referenced-project ignore scan (#12214)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Agent adapters stage referenced projects into controlled sandboxes
> - The ignore scan must preserve exact Git path bytes and fail closed
on unsafe input
> - Unbounded ignored-path data and raw diagnostics can harm resource
use or expose host details
> - This pull request adds exact path parsing, input bounds, fixed
failure categories, and saturation-only retry
> - The benefit is safer and more predictable referenced-project staging
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
The referenced-project ignore scan trimmed NUL-delimited Git paths. It
also accepted a large ignored-path set and exposed raw failure details
through staging errors and warnings.
**Expected behavior**
The scan must preserve leading and trailing whitespace in Git paths. It
must reject oversized ignored-path data and expose only fixed failure
categories.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run the referenced-project ignore scan with paths that start or end
with whitespace.
2. Provide more than 10,000 ignored entries or more than 2 MiB of path
bytes.
3. Trigger a scan failure and inspect the reported reason.
**Paperclip version or commit**
|
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
6880213de5 |
fix(adapter-utils): honor .gitignore for referenced-project staging (#12184)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Sandbox adapters stage project files before an agent starts. > - Referenced projects ignored Git-ignored paths and copied large local directories. > - This behavior increased staging time and disk use, and it differed from anchor workspaces. > - This pull request resolves Git-ignored paths once and shares that result across all referenced-project consumers. > - The benefit is smaller, faster, and consistent project staging. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public GitHub issue exists for this bug. **What happened?** Referenced-project staging copied Git-ignored paths, except for a fixed list of heavy directory names. A large repository therefore used much more time and disk space than the same repository in an anchor workspace. **Expected behavior** Referenced-project staging should exclude the same Git-ignored paths that the workspace staging path excludes. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Create a referenced project with a large Git-ignored directory. 2. Start a sandbox or SSH run that stages the referenced project. 3. Observe that the ignored directory enters the staged content. **Paperclip version or commit** Commit `9964b034bbff24e700c8eccf5a8b1fc3daa44bf2`. **Deployment mode** Built from source. ## What Changed - Resolve each referenced project's Git-ignored paths once before staging. - Carry the resolved paths as a required field on `SandboxAdditionalSource`. - Reuse the resolved paths in sandbox staging, SSH staging, and content-signature code. - Harden the read-only Git helper with a bounded process, a reduced environment, and disabled system and global configuration. - Fail closed on Git errors, timeouts, and invalid path relations. - Escape tar glob metacharacters in ignore-derived exclude entries. - Add and update unit tests for the resolver and its three consumers. ## Verification - `pnpm vitest run --config packages/adapter-utils/vitest.config.ts` passes 266 tests locally. - `pnpm exec tsc --noEmit -p packages/adapter-utils/tsconfig.json` passes locally. - CI must pass on this pull request. - Greptile must report 5/5 with no unresolved comments before merge. ## Risks - A Git error or timeout now prevents staging for the affected referenced project. - The resolver uses a bounded read-only Git process and fails closed by design. - The change stays inside `packages/adapter-utils` and does not change the database schema. ## Model Used Claude Sonnet 5 (Anthropic) assisted the implementation with code execution and tool use. The exact context window and reasoning mode are not recorded. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes: #` / `Refs: #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
|
6a267e0328 |
feat(sandbox): stage referenced projects into the run sandbox (#10469)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Runs can reference more than one project > - Each referenced project must land in its own sandbox tree so one run does not mix files across projects > - The anchor workspace must keep its own git history and overlay rules > - Fail closed on sync and confinement errors, and keep the other projects alive > - This pull request stages referenced projects into isolated project directories under the run sandbox root > - The benefit is safer multi-project runs with clear failure isolation ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public issue exists. Related PR: #10448. ## What Changed - Thread additional referenced-project sources through the run prepare path and the runtime layers. - Stage each referenced project into its own `project-<projectId>` directory under the runtime root. - Keep the anchor workspace history and overlay semantics unchanged. - Fail closed on confinement or sync errors for one project, and keep the other projects running. - Keep the path inert by default behind the multi-project workspace-sync kill-switch. - No documentation update was needed for this code-only runtime change. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-utils exec vitest run src/sandbox-file-sync.test.ts src/command-managed-runtime.test.ts src/sandbox-managed-runtime.test.ts src/remote-managed-runtime.test.ts` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-utils exec tsc --noEmit` - The branch points at `871378e4064a95adc8e4647e442ec1359768de61` on `origin/feat/stage-referenced-projects-into-sandbox`. - GitHub CI is green on PR #10469. ## Risks - A referenced project can skip if confinement or sync fails. - A new runtime tree layout can affect tools that assume one project root. - The kill-switch keeps the path inert until operators enable it. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, tool use enabled. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes or confirmed no docs update was needed - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
4e00818574 |
fix(runtime): support in-place workspace realization (#10230)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the control plane people use to coordinate AI agents and their execution environments. > - Environment realization decides where an agent runs and which filesystem and toolchain are authoritative. > - Copy-based realization is unsafe for container-anchored tasks because absolute paths such as `/app` can point outside the synchronized tree and task-specific binaries may be absent. > - That mismatch can let an agent successfully verify work in a phantom writable path while sync-back silently discards the result. > - Existing task environments already provide the authoritative filesystem and toolchain, so they should be executed in place rather than copied. > - Copy mode still needs explicit confinement rules so aliases target the synchronized workspace and unsynchronized writable paths fail visibly. > - This pull request adds typed realization metadata, propagates the authoritative root through orchestration, and teaches Codex to honor it. > - The benefit is that container-anchored tasks operate on verifier-visible state with the intended tools, while copy mode remains safe and backward compatible. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public GitHub issue exists for this defect. GitHub duplicate searches for in-place execution, workspace realization, and authoritative workspace roots found no related pull request to link. ### What happened? Environment-backed agent runs were always realized through a copied workspace. Tasks anchored to absolute container paths could therefore write outside the synchronized tree, and task-provided toolchains were unavailable in the copy. A run could report success even though sync-back discarded its output. ### Expected behavior Existing task environments should run against their real authoritative root and toolchain. Copy-mode runs should map declared absolute aliases into the synchronized tree and reject writable paths that cannot be restored. ### Steps to reproduce 1. Run a Codex task environment whose required files live under `/app` or `/workspace` and whose required binary exists only in the task container. 2. Observe that copy realization changes the effective filesystem/toolchain or permits writes outside the synchronized root. 3. Complete and verify the task inside the agent sandbox. 4. Observe that the verifier cannot see out-of-tree artifacts or that task-specific commands were unavailable. ### Reproduction context - Paperclip commit: `3a16b91217483d2c233926de5b7f7bc3a1077924` - Deployment: built from source in a task-container execution environment - Adapter: Codex local - Database: not database-related - Access context: agent execution ## What Changed - Added typed `copy | in_place` workspace-realization metadata, authoritative roots, confined aliases, and outbound restore paths to shared execution-target contracts. - Selected in-place realization for existing task environments and skipped archive prepare/restore when the authoritative environment is used directly. - Propagated the authoritative root into adapter context so Codex uses it for cwd and `PAPERCLIP_WORKSPACE_*` semantics, including ACP execution. - Bound copy-mode aliases such as `/app` to the synchronized workspace and rejected writable out-of-tree paths without explicit restore mappings. - Added focused regression coverage while preserving existing copy-mode archive restore behavior. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/shared typecheck` — passed. - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/adapter-utils/src/local-process-sandbox.test.ts packages/adapters/codex-local/src/server/acp.test.ts packages/adapters/codex-local/src/server/execute.remote.test.ts server/src/__tests__/environment-run-orchestrator.test.ts` — 48 passed, 4 skipped. - `pnpm -r typecheck` — passed. - `env -u AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID -u AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY -u AWS_SESSION_TOKEN pnpm test:run` — passed across all general and serialized Vitest shards. - `pnpm build` — passed. - Codex `k=1` acceptance run completed July 24, 2026 at 23:54:30 UTC with 4 completed, 0 exceptions, and mean reward 1.0: `build-cython-ext`, `openssl-selfsigned-cert`, `prove-plus-comm`, and `sqlite-db-truncate` each received terminal grade 1.0 against real task-environment paths and toolchains. ## Risks - In-place mode deliberately exposes the authoritative task root to the adapter; incorrect environment metadata could point execution at the wrong root. Typed metadata and focused orchestration tests cover selection and propagation. - Copy-mode writable-path validation is stricter and may reject previously accepted unsafe configurations. The rejection is intentional and produces a visible error instead of silently losing output. - The acceptance run is focused on four Codex task-environment workloads, not a broad cross-adapter benchmark. Existing copy-mode archive tests and the full repository suite remain green. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex CLI coding agent; exact model ID and context-window size were not exposed to this runtime. Capabilities used: extended reasoning, repository editing, shell execution, test/build execution, Git, GitHub CLI, and Paperclip API tool use. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |